Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Court Rules Private Land Can Be Seized for NBA Arena

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:03 PM
Original message
Court Rules Private Land Can Be Seized for NBA Arena
Source: WSJ

New York's highest court ruled Tuesday that it's lawful for a state economic development agency to seize private land to build an arena for a professional basketball team.

The 6-1 ruling by the New York State Court of Appeals allows the contentious $4.9 billion, 22-acre Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn, N.Y., to proceed. The proposed development includes office towers, apartments and a new arena for the NBA's New Jersey Nets.

It's a victory for developers and government entities in New York that have sought to boost local economies with new development. But it is a blow to private-property owners who have argued that they are defenseless in protecting their ownership rights if a government deems their land necessary for eminent domain, or the "public good."

The court's decision echoes a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2005, when the court found it was constitutional for a New London, Conn., economic-development corporation to seize private homes and businesses to build a research campus for Pfizer Inc. That decision, Kelo vs. New London, Conn., set off a firestorm of protest, prompting state lawmakers to amend laws to prevent local governments in those states from seizing private land in some cases......




Read more: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125907445356162357.html...



Well thank you Kelo!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
no_hypocrisy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. The legal standard for "blighted" is broad and vague IMO.
Edited on Tue Nov-24-09 01:07 PM by no_hypocrisy
It's a subjective standard in many cases. Even "slums" and "ghettos" have a flicker of economic life and are not moribund.

This situation is land-grabbing by carpetbaggers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Its the new super easy way to gentrify. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Altoid_Cyclist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #1
16. Land-grabbing and carpetbaggers fits well.
Edited on Tue Nov-24-09 01:48 PM by Altoid_Cyclist
The legal system seems to work a lot better for the wealthy. Now it could just be a coincidence, but I highly doubt it.

I can't imagine what it would be like to have a well maintained and paid-off house that has been in the family for two or three generations basically stolen from me.



Nice looking house with a view of the water and to lose it to the SCOTUS???

The people who wind up being displaced seem to be an afterthought with the legal system now in place. I wonder if they would have been able to receive the same legal decision had they decided to build it in Greenwich, CT?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wpelb Donating Member (292 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #1
55. "Urban renewal" = "Negro removal"
There's been a lot of reaction through the years to Kelo, including efforts to pass draconian anti-land-use-planning laws that many find objectionable. But wealthy and upper-middle-class whites aren't the only ones who find "eminent domain" laws as interpreted under Kelo to be problematic. These laws can be used to engage in "urban renewal," a euphemism, as implied in the title, for getting rid of black people. The only blacks that wealthy city planners and developers want to see in their neighborhoods are those in basketball shorts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bozita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
3. Is this arena gonna be another taxpayer-financed project for ultra-wealthy team owners?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
47of74 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Computer says yes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Doesn't matter...
They are literally seizing people's land because its not taxable enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DCKit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #5
19. Sure, but then they turn around and give the "developers" tax breaks.
It's lose-lose for the taxpayers. Once the municipalities have made these Faustian deals, the taxpayers are left with debt and higher tax bills to make up the difference. It's very similar to the way the World Bank and IMF operate, but I guess they had to learn it from somewhere.

(Said as I sit here looking out over the new National's stadium in DC)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #3
32. isn't it always??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brendan120678 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
6. Unfortunately, I don't know if the NY Court of Appeals had any other choice...
Kelo held that the taking of land by eminent domain for private use was legal, as long as there would be a "public good" evolving out of it.

Don't really think that moving the Nets from NJ to Brooklyn is "public good," but whatever.

Stupid Supreme Court really fucked up that decision. Now it will be taken advantage of at every opportunity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Yep....
We are stuck until another court revokes this asinine ruling. If that ever happens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beyond cynical Donating Member (150 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. And to think that Kelo was a decision was made by the liberals on the court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SharonAnn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #10
48. And Pfizer has cancelled their manufacturing facility plans there. The lynchpin of the case.
All this effort, land taken from the owners, and the "public benefit" to be gained by the Pfizer plant providing jobs is lost.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RobinA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #48
52. We Had That Happen
Edited on Wed Nov-25-09 04:12 PM by RobinA
This isn't Kelo, but the state condemned a lot of property around us for a reservior. Nice, well kept 18th century farmhouses that had a lot invested in them including historical value, some newer houses, nothing that was even remotely an eyesore. Then they decided not to build. So the houses sit there and rot. Old, once proud homes. They try to rent them out, but not many renters have the money to keep up a farmhouse and the state certainly doesn't want to do it. It's really a shame to see these homes crumble.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that this abandoned property is not producing a lot of tax revenue. They did turn it into a park, which is good, but the state ran people out of homes they had put much time and effort into.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. So how is a new arena for the "public good" if it displaces families?
Tickets to attend events at arenas aren't exactly cheap, and so many of these types of facilities become a burden on taxpayers after a few years.

:shrug:

The SCOTUS truly was wrong on this decision.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr. Strange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #8
33. $$$$$$$
Edited on Tue Nov-24-09 04:55 PM by Dr. Strange
Politicians get more tax money to spend. That's their definition of "public good."

Edit to add: but you're right--Kelo was a bad decision.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 02:23 AM
Response to Reply #8
41. In this case because the stadium will provide jobs both building it
and afterwords, now what I am wondering is did they try to buy the land first and if so how much did they offer?
If they didn't make any offer or atleast fair offer then the government should not have gotten involved and they misused the right of eminent domain, if they did make an offer and it was being held up due to some holdouts trying to gouge for more money then sorry, it was their own fault for being greedy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #41
42. You can't possibly be serious....
So people should be required to sell if its "enough" money. What if you're elderly and just don't want to leave your home? What if you grew up in that house and you just don't want to sell. Your remarks are really beyond the pale.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #42
49. Nope, I didnt say they should be required
solely if enough money is offered, its more complicated then that, if you are unable to grasp then then I feel for you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #49
50. Well then by all means....
Try to explain it more clearly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #50
54. I tried that already, you werent willing to listen then but if something changed just
reread what I posted earlier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #54
57. Apparently, not well enough. Try again for the masses. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #57
58. Well, its clear nothing has changed with you then, feel free to get back to me when it does. Ciao!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #58
59. Ah, evasion.
Too transparent. Better luck next time. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-28-09 04:36 AM
Response to Reply #59
60. Well played, Glenn Beck would be that you learned your lesson so well from him.
Edited on Sat Nov-28-09 04:45 AM by cstanleytech
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurska Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-28-09 04:56 AM
Response to Reply #8
61. The NBA requires 500 tickets be available at 10 dollars a pop for every game.
Edited on Sat Nov-28-09 05:00 AM by Kurska
Anyone, not matter the income bracket can attend a NBA game if they book it early enough when tickets go on sale.
Usually you can even get tickets to a few games well after the tickets go on sale, so it isn't like they are hard to get.

Anyways, not agreeing with the decision, but the NBA is not a exclusive rich people's spectator's sport.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #6
18. kelo was a federal decision
the NY court of appeals must also take into account the NY state constitution.

i have never read the NY state constitution, and don't know most NY case law, so i can't speak as to whether this is a legally valid decision, of course. i think from a practical standpoint - it sucks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #18
53. Kelo was based on a state law, though....
Edited on Wed Nov-25-09 04:11 PM by jberryhill
Most people don't realize that Kelo has no relevance in most states.

The breadth of eminent domain available to any state government is determined by that state's eminent domain law.

Most states already do not permit takings for the purposes discussed in Kelo, rendering the entire point moot in those states.

The question in Kelo was whether the breadth of that state's law was constitutional.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Erebus67 Donating Member (78 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #6
29. And now that land just sits abandoned. Disgusting really
They threw people out of their homes and gave it to a developer that never did anything with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #6
46. socialize the risks, privatize the profit.
it's THE american way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
9. Thank you once again to Kelo v. New London
A bullshit decision that turns homes and neighborhoods into a property tax cash cow for city politicians with sticky fingers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sharp_stick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Yup
and now that Pfizer has decided to ditch their multi million dollar research site in New London all that city has is an empty building and flat land. Not one single developer has come forward with any plan for the site.

It still sucks for the people that lost their homes but there is a bit of schadenfruede (sp?) in watching the assholes that set off this mess try to cover their asses in the local media.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. The IRONY, It Burns
Pfizer is too big for its britches, let alone too big to succeed. They spread poverty and misery everywhere they go. They are looters, just as much as Madoff and Stanford and Citibank and Chase.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brendan120678 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. What's even worse with Kelo, is that Pfizer is now...
abandoning that site altogether because they are consolidating some of their offices, including this one. The jobs there are being moved a few miles away to another facility they own in Groton, CT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backtomn Donating Member (424 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #9
25. Nice Job Pfizer
Did you hear that Pfizer decided not to utilize the land that it demanded in the Kelo decision. People lost their property, but the corporation decided not to do anything with the property. Nice job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:33 PM
Response to Original message
13. My objection to Kelo was that it let the government...
...seize private property and give it to someone else as private property.

The article on the arena for the New Jersey Nets is unclear about who will own the arena.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xxqqqzme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. I willing to bet the new owners
will not include many, if any, of the old owners.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Erebus67 Donating Member (78 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #13
31. That was exactly my objection.
I was really surprised by which justices voted which way. I really expected it to be the complete opposite of what happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
15. The irony is that Kelo was for naught
The land was never developed and now Pfizer, which was going to be the main beneficiary, is closing its plant there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:50 PM
Response to Original message
20. It's nice to know that the state of New York has its priorities straight
:nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iandhr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 01:56 PM
Response to Original message
21. In reality
The arena is to be build on a empty lot.

The land that is being seized includes a multi-billon dollar redevelopment project for Brooklyn which the arena is a small piece. The others part includes office and residential space (I think)


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beavker Donating Member (784 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
22. Not that I condone the taking of land for big $ devolopers...
but I wish this would apply to San Diego, so my damn Chargers could just take some land so they could move out of that outdated Quaqmire Stadium. If they don't find a new home soon somewhere at least in the county they are going to move, and that would be a bad deal for San Diego. As much as the haters don't want to spend the money, it's a huge deal. They CANNOT have a Superbowl in San Diego ever again per the NFL, whilst they play in that outdated hole. Since L.A. has no team, and the two big arenas in L.A. are likewise outdated venues, it's incredible that Southern California (might I remind you that So Cal could use some Cash?) can't even have a Superbowl. I lived in San Diego when the last one was there, and the city was rockin'.

Anyway, off subject a bit. But this is an example of someone who could take advantage of the ruling?

(P.S., the land the stadium is on now would probably command a good retail or tax dollar because it's on prime condo/shopping land).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
24601 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #22
26. I just want my town to take my neighbor's house & land and give it
to me so that we can have a big fenced yard for our dog. I've even figured the "public purpose" out for them - less beagle poop on other public land.

What a Country!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KamaAina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
23. This project ought to go over like a lead balloon
at least the NBA part of it.

The Nets have yet to win a game all season. They're 0-13. Even the Knicks look good by comparison. :eyes:

So this could easily end up just like Pfizer in New London: eminent domain --> changing circumstances --> white elephant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
24. Land mines may be a solution
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
27. An outrage. And Newark is also being screwed over in this.
The Nets have been playing at the Newark Prudential Center, and all indications were the fans were liking it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rdmtimp Donating Member (265 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. The Nets still play at Izod Center in the Meadowlands...
not Newark - the Prudential Center is where the NHL Devils play.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #28
37. The Nets have been playing some preseason games at the Prudential Center recently
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurska Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-28-09 05:01 AM
Response to Reply #37
62. They should move to Newark, it is stupid to put another team in New York.
Seriously, it failed in LA with the clippers and it will fail here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katkat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 04:35 PM
Response to Original message
30. states
A number of states passed laws prohibiting their state and town etc, governments from taking private land for private purposes after the Connecticut disaster. Not NY, apparently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
damntexdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 05:39 PM
Response to Original message
34. Texans just voted in a constitutional amendment that would block this sort of thing.
That is until the pols and big money find a way around it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 05:40 PM
Response to Original message
35. Now even private property is no longer safe from the gaping maws of the Corporatists
Edited on Tue Nov-24-09 05:41 PM by Odin2005
Disgusting, just disgusting. And they call themselves supporters of Freedom. FUCK THEM!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. No one and nothing is safe from them and their Inverted Totalitarianism
Edited on Tue Nov-24-09 06:09 PM by tom_paine
They HAVE us, as thoroughly as their ancestors had THEIR slaves.

Our slavery, at least for the tiniest while longer until shit starts running out, is much more pleasant thanks to vast advances in psychology, advertising and PR.

There's only one way out, and that is the way of the Founding Fathers.

Even that opportunity has been foreseen and preemptively taken away by driving at least one-thirdof the nation clincally insane with decades of Nazi-Bushiganda.

Now, when TSHTF, just as it was before, if anyone dares raise their hand against our Masters, a whole new generation of Authority-Blessed-Brownshirts will be there to stamp it out.

Plus a change, plus a la meme chose
(the more things change, the more they stay the same)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
38. Makes as much sense as the deal Dubya worked to get land for a Texas Rangers ballpark. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #38
47. which is COMPLETE senes.
from the perspective of the wealthy elites.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
regnaD kciN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 09:04 PM
Response to Original message
39. Fuck the NBA
Ever since they allowed Clay Bennett to steal the Supersonics, despite the fact that the team was strongly supported and had just been built a new city-funded arena ten years before, the NBA is dead to me. And that includes the Celtics, my favorite team in all of sport for many years.

:nuke:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurska Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-28-09 05:04 AM
Response to Reply #39
63. Okay no most of that is wrong.
Edited on Sat Nov-28-09 05:09 AM by Kurska
1. The team was not strongly supported it had the worst ticket sales of any team for nearly 5 years
2. The Key Arena wasn't built 10 years earlier it was nearly a 30 year old arena that got renovations in the 90's that were barely up to snuff then, much less when the team was forced to move.
3. The NBA gave Seattle plenty of time to build a new arena, Stern had been up there going back to the 90's saying the renovations weren't going to work and the city needed a new arena, Seattle reponsed by overwhelming passing a amendment that made building arenas impossible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
therealbarack Donating Member (33 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-24-09 11:24 PM
Response to Original message
40. Eminent domain run amok
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BennyD Donating Member (207 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
43. This crap should never happen. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrCory Donating Member (862 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
44. Golly Gee!...I thought government was our friend now. N/T
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 11:27 AM
Response to Original message
45. new jersey nets...? brooklyn...?
Edited on Wed Nov-25-09 11:27 AM by dysfunctional press
shouldn't they be seizing land in jersey?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davepc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #45
56. The multimillionare real estate developer and russian billionare who own the team want to move it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sofa king Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
51. The solution, then, is to make land seizures economically and politically costly.
Edited on Wed Nov-25-09 01:22 PM by sofa king
By fighting them tooth and nail in the courts, and then by fighting it out in local elections, then by dismantling the mechanisms by which corporations can bribe local governments into exercising eminent domain.

If the town councils face recall and defeat as a result of their land-snatching, they're certain to determine that "eminent domain" clearly lies in their safe reelection, rather than stealing land.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Jul 23rd 2019, 02:10 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC